 |
| Silverfiddle Rant! |
My view of our nation's future has turned dark and cynical, but I am always on the lookout for rays of hope, and they are out there, among millennials and post-millennials, of all people. (Children really are, to quote that vapid leftwing tautology, the future.)
When the media's gaze is upon you, it’s difficult to change your mind.I've said it before and I'll say it again. If anything can save post-modern America, it is libertarianism...
This week, New York magazine’s The Cut published an article titled, “Did Emma Sulkowicz Get Redpilled?” The story chronicles the political awakening of 27-year-old Sulkowicz, who became famous in 2014 for dragging her mattress around Columbia University’s campus to protest the university’s handling of her alleged sexual assault.
The act of performance art, dubbed Mattress Performance (Carry That Weight), became a flash point for a national conversation about campus sexual assault. Democratic Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York even invited her to the State of the Union address in 2015.
And what about her posture has changed? She now listens to Jordan Peterson. She attended Reason writer Robby Soave’s book party for Panic Attack: Young Radicals in the Age of Trump. In the book, Soave writes critically of Sulkowicz.Her own words:
“As I became more and more feminist,” she said, “I think I got to a point where I was literally just straight up hating men. I just hated men, I wished all men would die.”Progressive Academia has morphed into a post-modern Ministry of Truth, indoctrinating everyone into parroting 2+2=5, but the human mind cannot be chained forever. Progressive "historical arcs" be damned. The human spirit will always bend toward freedom and liberty.
Now she wants to listen to their perspective — not just men, but others she has disagreed with.
The most remarkable part of the story, though perhaps not the most surprising, is that Sulkowicz says she didn't even know a conservative until last year.
If anything can save post-modern America, it is libertarianism...
ReplyDeleteFrom your lips (as it were) to America’s ears. But my cynicism won’t let me believe that the body of the Citizenry will see that light. Libertarianism is hard; it doesn’t allow one much latitude in the way of hypocrisy, convenience and expediency.
Thus, most will blindly follow one of the two herds of lemmings.
But for “mattress girl” it’s at least good to have a public display of the eventually result of shallow, postured virtue signaling.
That day you find that guy with D-cell batteries pierced through his earlobes really isn't cool. Some grow up, most grow old.
ReplyDeleteAs my late father always said, "Tolerance is not acceptance, it is not validation, it is not celebration. Tolerance merely means I won't kill you."
ReplyDeleteDad, in his way, railed against the miles progressives want to take when an inch is conceded. One of his peeves was the ever present insistence that toleration had to go so far as subsidization. He didn't care what anyone did on their own dime as long as it was on their own dime.
I too look for glimmers of hope for a change in the tide to the rush to Socialism and beyond. We live in an alternative universe apparently where facts mean nothing, and the ends justify the means.
ReplyDeleteI was hopeful until this impeachment nonsense... our Republic died the day the Democrats moved to this crazy impeachment nonsense. Anyone who cannot see where this decision will lead to effect future generations is in denial.
The sad reality of "this impeachment nonsense" Bunkerville, is the profound partisan divide, the cognitive dissonance exposure, or perhaps the selling out of party loyalty over the fate of our electoral and democracy process.
DeleteThe impeachment arguments are binary. 1 side sees a party hellbent on undoing an election and defying the will of the people mainly out of hatred of the President and the disappointment of losing in 2016. The other says the President bribed a foreign adversary in order to advance his political advantage with congressional appropriated funding and then obstructing congressional investigation powers.
But yes, the impeachment process as well as our legislative system has been made a mockery of.
The reaction to the Horowitz report confirms my growing suspicion that after the 2020 election this nation is going to pretty much come apart at the seams no matter which side wins. You think the left side is ugly now, but if they lose the White House again they are going to create a whole new definition of ugly. If they win the White House they are going to be the ugliest winners in history, and the right side is going to be hell bent on revenge.
DeleteI am 76 years old. I've seen this coming for more than a decade and hoped I would not live long enough to see it arrive. Unfortunately, I am still in pretty good health, so I probably will. I'm hoping for a heart attack or a stroke.
Jayhawk, you sound a lot like my Dad (he passed at 75) in seeing a civil war coming. He and I disagreed alot over Trump (his pro-Trumpness is echoed alot here by other posters) while I would point out that for all of Trump's bluster, he hasn't set back the left even a nanometer. I'd ask what culturally, socially, economically, or geopolitically conservative thing Trump has achieved since taking office and get the deer in the headlights look. The "at least he snot Hillary" vibe died. Maybe there will be a civil war someday, but I guarantee it won't be a fight over Trump's garbage level integrity.
DeleteTC, have to disagree that Trump hasn't set the left back. Legislation and Exec Orders can be changed with new administration or super-majority legislators.
DeleteMitch McConnell, with Trump's nominees, has spent his entire capital on changing the courts for many many years to come. And I'm not simply referring to Gorsuch and Kavanaugh(R).
RJW, there's a lot of "ifs" between here and there. If someone has standing to argue Constitutionality. If a lower court the case or appeal. If a higher court will uphold or reverse a decision. If an alleged conservative judge remains conservative. If Congress doesn't decide to disband and recreate courts...
DeleteLots of ifs.
TC, by that argument, there's really no way a sitting president of either party could ever set the other party back or change a "culturally, socially, economically, or geopolitically" ideology.
DeleteIt would all be contingent on the future "ifs".
TC, my comment was not about what Trump has or has not done. It was about the hate and vituperation spewed by 50% of the nation (who voted against Trump) against the other 50% (who voted for him). This will come to a boil in November of 2020 when one side loses the election, and there will be hell to pay. It will have nothing whatever to do with Trump, anything he has done, or anything he has not done. It will have to do with the 50% of the voters who hate him beyond tolerance, and what they will do to the other 50% who do not hate him.
DeleteJayhawk, I divide the world into thirds. Those against us, those for us, and those that wonder why cottage cheese has an expiration date. Sometimes the numbers shake out unevenly, but that cottage cheese group are the ones you don't want making civil war decisions. Or maybe they're the ones that have kept the civil war from happening all along. What's important is that no extreme is ever going to pull more than a third.
DeleteRJW, we've already seen allegedly conservative judges fail conservative expectations (John Roberts on Obamacare...) so I still see it as a crapshoot. We've been doing the conservative-judges-will-ban-abortion dance for 46 years...
DeleteRespectably TC, just this weak, Republicans confirmed Sarah Pitlyk, a 42-year-old conservative lawyer who received a “not qualified” rating from the American Bar Association to a lifetime seat. The ABA’s reasoning was that Pitlyk has never even tried a case or even lead or co-counsel.
DeleteWednesday, Lawrence VanDyke a lifetime federal judge, despite the American Bar Association rating him “not qualified” because, according to his own colleagues, he is “arrogant, lazy, an ideologue, and lacking in knowledge of the day-today practice including procedural rules.”
More than 200 national civil and human rights groups opposed VanDyke.
The final tally on the Senate floor yesterday was 51 to 44, a partisan vote.
Thus far, 172 of Trump’s judicial nominees: 120 district court nominees, 50 circuit court nominees, and two Supreme Court nominees, have been seated. Or put another way, about one in five federal judges was chosen by Donald Trump. Most of these jurists are quite young – some are in their 30s – and they’ll serve on the federal bench for many decades.
Also note, this has happened in just three years. There’s still another year remaining in Trump’s term – and there’s a very real possibility he’ll get a second term, at which point the judiciary would shift to the far right in ways that would likely remain unchanged for most of the remainder of the 21st century.
Politico reported this morning that the rate at which Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has pushed through the Republican White House’s judicial nominees is “staggering.”
Note: Parts of this is lifted simply because I'm tired from a long day, much still to do, and wanted to respond before the conversation had long rolled off the page.
RJW, so many things can be said about the largely mythical "far right" in the US. Litigiousness isn't one of those things. There's a lot of smoke but no fire there. I don't foresee any real setback to the left from Ttump's judicial nominations. I just don't.
DeleteTC, I apologize for taking another kick at this dead horse but if an overwhelming stacking of the of government functions with corporate loyalist as well as changing the dynamics of the courts for years to come is of no set back to the left, what could possibly be?
DeleteMaybe I'm confused to your interpretation of the left wing agenda but I would think it falls along the line of pro-union (which is a portion of their bread and butter), climate infinitives, women and gender rights, gender pay equality, the equality gap, reproductive rights, minimum wage increases, and then of course preserving ACA and/or building on it.
Okay so I get it that Exec orders can be overturned on day 1 of a new president. I get it that in the event of a Dem legislative take over, legislation can be easily reversed.
But these lifetime judicial seats are a different story. And the picks ain't exactly Democratic legislation friendly. 1 judge can challenge any EO or legislation and stop it in its tracks, leaving it up the SC to either rule against it or not take it up at all.
Court packing? I suppose we could use the "if" word here but I don't see it and it's a rather drastic move. And even if they did, the SC will still be a tight vote and the lower courts are still in tact.
And again, if this hasn't made a profound challenge to Democrats, what possibly could?
I'm encouraged by the impeachment process insomuch as at least some in Congress finally want to reassert that the branches of the government are equal. The cynical partisan in me is distressed and perhaps incredulous that it's the Democrats that want to reassert the Constitution, but in the Trump void, maybe that's nature abhorring a vacuum. Whichever of the 28 quintillion policy and political differences I have with Dems is temporarily paused by the pressing matter that yes we do have a President that has abused his power and obstructed Congress' oversight powers, disrupting the checks and balances our Constitution is framed upon. Sorry not sorry, Team Constitution says Trump should be impeached. There's a few other laws Trump broke that the Democrats aren't even addressing, so neutral praise for the Dems impeachment "effort" can only go so far, but at least there is an effort on inarguably solid ground. It's on the Republicans if they want to further trash their own credibility now, if that's even possible after nominating Trump over one of the 156 million more qualified Americans to be President.
ReplyDeleteTC, I really can't see Republicans changing course. They've gone all in. They've followed Trump so far down the rabbit hole that they have no choice but to depend on his lead.
DeleteSomeone in the Senate needs to propose that the impeachment verdict vote be secret ballot and let the 8 to 15 Republican Senators that are immutably devoted to Trump rather than the Constitution argue publicly why it shouldn't be secret ballot. The dance about accountability would be worth the popcorn.
DeleteTC, Since the GOOP is spilling over with pusillanimous cowards and weasels, your plan would probably work.
DeleteAside from the appalling ethical lapse demonstrated by Mike Pence when he didn't laugh and hang up on Trump's "will you be my running mate" phone call, what is the fear of the Mike Pence Presidency that impeaching Trump would bring? The "Trump dindu nuffin" defense by a notably small but loud group of GOP Senatorial camera hogs doesn't pass the smell test for a majority of Americans. A secret ballot would at least give the bulk of Republicans in the Senate that aren't Trump fans to vote without fallout considerations. Maybe Jeff Sessions is making lots of phone calls to old friends.;)
DeleteI know if I were a Senator, I wouldn't want to be on a list of people that acquitted Trump.
Two forces are at work, the "class divide" under "progressive liberalism and the Left's awakening from their false (PC) class consciousness.
ReplyDeleteAnother obstacle for left-wing upper-middle-class radicals is their own debilitating false consciousness, which easily exceeds the confusion frequently ascribed to the working class. Instead of frankly acknowledging their own professional class interests,35 they project their concerns onto the working class and present themselves as altruistic saviors—only to complain about a lack of working-class enthusiasm later. This blindness often prevents them from recognizing where their interests diverge from the purported beneficiaries of their projects and impedes their ability to effect any larger political realignment. It also exacerbates the temptation to double down on parts of the current paradigm—such as enlarging the NGO racket—which only strengthens the billionaires in the long term.
Political Correctness is a strategy to associate with the Silicon Valley neoliberal elite billionaire 0.1% class
Bad link above.
Delete:P
DeleteJoe,
DeleteI took a look -- albeit brief. Grim!
It's an astute, albeit Marxian, analysis...
DeleteMarxian thinkers have been analyzing these dynamics for almost two centuries, but they have often misread the political effects of these developments, which play out primarily among the elite managerial class, rather than within the binary of capitalists and proletarians.
Who in the 19th century, could have predicted the rise of the "salaried bourgeousie"?
...and as the author glumly states:
DeleteUltimately, the question that will determine the future of American politics is whether the rest of the elite will consent to their continued proletarianization only to further enrich this pathetic oligarchy. If they do, future historians of American collapse will find something truly exceptional: capitalism without competence and feudalism without nobility.
Time to replace the "salaried" bourgeois" with the more traditional "bourgeois owner". But it'll take a "legal/taxation/tariff" revolution to restore the old order.
It's worse than pseudoscience... it's "psychology".
DeleteOf course. It's crazy to be in control of yourself ;)
Delete...when it's the "social norm" to act "crazy".
DeleteNah. "Civilized" people have been paving over the wild and free for millenia :P
DeleteOur only hope as indviduals iies in developing a sincere and humble aceptance of Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior followed by sedulous devotion todo our best to implement His teachings in the ordinary, everyday events of life..
ReplyDeleteThe World will never change. It will always be a place of brutality, turmoil, torment, frustration, and injustice. We are not here to transform the world, but to learn how to live decently, productively and lovingly within its profoundly perplexing confines.
All else is evasion of the Essential Truth of Being.
I live in NOLA.
ReplyDeleteI used to be a libertarian.
That was before Katrina.
Libertarianism causes Mayor Nagin and his government of cowardly Democrats to hole up on high ground while leaving the city's residents to fend for themselves or drown? Who knew?
DeleteOnce on the government test, it’s hard to detach, eh Goose?
Delete@!#%$ auto correct - "teat"
DeleteOnly an illiterate moron would NOT have known what you meant, CI.
DeleteMy typing has gotten so bad thanks to advancing arthritis, tenonnitis and legal blindness, I have no choice but to assume that others are smart enough to "get it" without any attempts on my part to make corrections.
Those who can't "get it," are probably not worth talking to in any event.
I have much more trouble with those who habitually use INITIALS and ACRONYMS the I do wth TYPOS.
Aside from USA, IRS, CIA, FBI, and the standard abbreviations for the states like VA, NJ, MD, NY, PA, etc. I'm invariably confounded by the flippant flinging about of initials by those who dare to ASSUME "everybody" does –– or should –– know what the hell they are talking about.